Trump takes steps to make good on border security promise

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

This is a rush transcript from "Watters' World," April 7, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

JESSE WATTERS, HOST: Welcome to "Watters' World." I'm Jesse Watters.

President Trump taking steps this week to make good on his campaign promise to secure our border with Mexico ordering the end to the policy known as "Catch and Release." And spending up to 4,000 members of the National Guard to protect the area following a recent uptick in illegal border crossings.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And remember my opening remarks at Trump Tower when I opened, everybody said, "Oh, he was so tough." And I used the word "rape." Women are raped at levels that nobody has never seen before.

But we cannot let people enter our country. We have who they are, what they do, where they came from. We have no idea what their records are. This is the kind of stuff and crap that we are allowing in our country.


WATTERS: This new plan coming as Mexico puts the brakes on a migrant caravan's plans to travel to the United States.

Joining me now, the Executive Director of the National Immigration Forum, Ali Noorani.

All right, Ali, let's just take this one step at a time. Are you okay with people illegally crossing the southern border into the United States?

ALI NOORANI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM: What I would like to say, Jesse is that we are solving real problems, and that means that we need smart border security and we need them.


WATTERS: Okay, but which is -- I want to take it one step at a time, Ali. Are you okay with illegal immigration into the United States?

NOORANI: No, off course not, Jesse. We believe in a strong border.

WATTERS: Okay, good. So, in order to stop...

NOORANI: We start with an agreement.

WATTERS: Illegal immigration -- absolutely good. So, let's put that aside. We agree. In order to stop now illegal immigration into the United States, don't you think the most of effective way to do that would be through a wall and through National Guard troops?

NOORANI: So, let's look at the data, okay. The data shows that in March of last year, we had a record low number of border apprehensions. Now you are going to say, "But we have seen an increase." We have seen a small increase.

WATTERS: We have -- we have seen a big increase.

NOORANI: But still, the numbers we see are -- just one second. The numbers that we see now are nowhere near the numbers that we have seen in previous administrations. So, if you want to...

WATTERS: Okay, I get that, so you're saying, your argument is this, Ali. Your argument is this, it's not as bad as it used to be, but that's not really what we are talking about, okay? We are talking about stopping illegal immigration. If it's still going on, then that means the problem hasn't been solved. Now, let's get back to my original second question. How would you solve the illegal immigration problem at the border?

NOORANI: You actually develop a process that people can go through. That is how you stop illegal immigration. And if you want to invest...

WATTERS: What do you mean by go through?

NOORANI: That means, you reform the immigration system. But let me talk about border security for just a second here. If you want to spend money...


WATTERS: Okay, let's keep it on the border security though.

NOORANI: That's what I am doing here, yes, so, if you want to spend money on the border to secure a nation, then you invest in ports of entry? That's where you see the majority of drugs, guns, and money being smuggled. Let's spend money at ports of entry and ensure our security there. That's what the real problem here is, Jesse. It is drugs coming into the country.

WATTERS: Okay, listen. I agree that a lot of bad stuff flows across the ports of entry. I agree, drugs, heroin -- it's a big problem and that needs to be addressed.

On the other hand, last year 300,000 people crossing the southern border illegally were caught. We don't even know about the ones that weren't caught. So, can't you also address the border as well as the ports of entry?

NOORANI: So, if you want to secure the border outside the ports of entry, that's where you put technology, that's where you put strategic infrastructure. Those are the smart things that you do on the border. That's what this administration has a chance to do.

But if you actually want to solve the drug problem, if you want to solve the drug problem, I mean, last year over 40,000 people died because of opioid addiction. Let's put our prosecutorial resources going after drug crimes.

I mean, right now, we are spending so much time and money -- we are spending over 50 percent on federal prosecution on our immigration. Only 14 percent are on opioid addiction. That's killing -- that's literally killing American (inaudible)...


WATTERS: I agree, but I think you are not giving the United States enough credit. I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time. You are saying that you know, people are coming across the southern border, that we need strategic infrastructure. Would that mean a wall?

NOORANI: If you want to be smart and strategic, it means that you put fencing in certain places. It doesn't mean, you know, a wall is a great symbol.


NOORANI: A wall is a beautiful symbol, but I would rather have smart policy in place that balances boots at ports of entry and strategic infrastructure and between the technology. A wall is a great symbol. It makes everybody happy and very angry, but it doesn't actually solve the problem.

WATTERS: But walls work, and I think that's why a lot of people on the Democratic side don't want them. Walls are very effective and the Border Patrol wants a wall. I think a vast majority of them want a wall because they know that is going to stop the crossings.

Let me show you a picture of a wall right now in New Mexico. This is a very old wall that needs to be replaced immediately. I think we have a picture of some people scaling it. This was just the other day we have people on each other's shoulders climbing a 20-foot structure.

It's obviously not secure because you can climb and I have been down there, too, and I climbed the same wall.

NOORANI: So, this is a great example of non-strategic infrastructure. So, yes, let's look at that figure...


WATTERS: Yes, I agree. So, that's why Trump is coming and building a big beautiful wall that's 40-feet high.

NOORANI: So, you know, we can spend $40 billion on this big, beautiful wall or we can actually solve our problem and this particular space -- the structure that was -- sorry, those are my tax dollars, you know, I don't see the difference between $20 billion and $40 billion. That's still a lot of money.

WATTERS: Well, actually, Mexico is going to pay for it so that's beside the point.

NOORANI: Yes, of course.


WATTERS: All right, listen, the only people that are making money on the border are the cartels. And the only thing that is going to stop the illegal immigration and the cartels running wild are boots on the ground and a big, beautiful wall. Ali, I have got to run, but thanks for coming on with me and having a discussion with me, I really appreciate it.

NOORANI: Thanks, Jesse.

WATTERS: All right, joining me now, a 20-year veteran of the Border Patrol and current President of the National Border Patrol Council, Brandon Judd.

Okay, Brandon, you heard my discussion with Ali, was there anything he said that was inaccurate or that you would like to address, being you know, having all of that experience down there on the border?

BRANDON JUDD, PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL BORDER PATROL COUNCIL: Yes, there are a couple of things. When he says that the vast majority of the drugs come across the ports of entry, that's not true. In fact, the border patrol seizes more drugs than any other agency minus the Coast Guard in the entire United States.

Most of drugs are coming across...


JUDD: Most drugs are coming across the border between the ports of entry, not through the ports of entry. I was a K-9 handler and I can tell you how many pounds of drugs that I used to seize with my K-9 all the time. It's happening all the time.

So, we do have...

WATTERS: And a lot of that is heroin now is what our research is showing.

JUDD: It is. It is heroin. It's the opioid bases. It's what's killing all these people in the United States. So, we have to secure the border and I have to applaud President Trump for putting the National Guard on the border because that allows us to go after what the actual problem is which is the criminal cartels.

Their profits are based upon getting things through the border which includes humans, it includes narcotic, it includes, if you will, even fake Oakleys. They have to get their products across the border.

And so, if we secure the border...

WATTERS: Yes, we've got to crack down on the fake Oakley market. You know, you are right and I said that to Ali, you know, every time a migrant wants to cross the border, he has to pay a coyote, and then the coyote pays the cartel.

Whether it's a human, whether it is heroin, whatever goes along that border, the cartel is making a profit and they get a chunk of everything that goes across.

So, if you are going to shut down the illegal immigration, what that is going to do is that is going to take a chunk out of the profit of the cartel and that is going to diminish their power and that is going to allow the Mexican government to exert more power over them.

JUDD: Well, so if you look at it -- so you have to look at the ways that we can in fact secure the border and what Ali said is we need infrastructure -- technical infrastructure. We tried that before. We tried SBInet. It was an absolute and complete failure, but what we have seen is physical barriers.

WATTERS: What was that that was tried that you said?

JUDD: It was called SBInet and that was supposed to be all of these radars that were supposed to detect things that come across that were supposed to put us in on it and it didn't work, but what has worked is physical barriers.

So, if we put the proper physical barriers in the proper locations, which allows the Border Patrol, me, to dictate where the smugglers bring in their product, I will be a lot more successful. We will be able to put a dent in their profits and hopefully put them out of business.

WATTERS: So, you're going to be able to kind of funnel the cross-border traffic where you want to it to be strategically based on what you put the fencing. Obviously, you're not going to put a fence on the Rio Grande or over a mountain top, but at the same time, you know the patterns better than anybody.

So, you're going to funnel it to your advantage. That makes perfect sense. Last question...

WATTERS: ... do you get the sense that people don't want the wall because they know the wall works?

JUDD: Yes. What you want -- you see the left politicizing this issue all the time. We want to stop talking about this issue. We don't want this to be a 2020 debate. We want to once and for all secure the border so that we don't have to continue to stay here and say, "Well, we need this or we need that." We know what we need, give us what we need. Let's get the Republicans behind this President. Give him what he needs. We will secure the border, and it's over.

WATTERS: It's funny you know, the Democrats want to fund every part of the government except the military and the Border Patrol. The two agencies that need the most money and need it the most out of everybody. I don't understand it and you are called a racist probably because you want to secure the southern border. What do you to those people?

JUDD: Well that presupposes that the only people that we arrest at the border are coming from Mexico or South America and that is completely and totally untrue. I have personally arrested people from Russia, from Poland, from all over the Ukraine, so we arrest people from everywhere. It's not racist.

WATTERS: Wait a second. This is breaking news. This is breaking news. You are telling me that if the Russians are coming across the southern border, I just figured out a way to get the Democrats to want a fund the wall. I mean, you know they want the Mexicans coming over and the Central Americans.

You tell those Democrats the Russians are coming and they are going to start tweeting mean things about Hillary, they are going to build the wall themselves.

JUDD: Well, remember Russians (inaudible)...


WATTERS: I've got to run. That's right, that's right. Up next, CNN collapsing and we're going to tell you why.

WATTERS: The struggles of CNN, that is the subject of tonight's Watters' Words. The Fox News channel used to compete against CNN, but not anymore. Take a look at the basic cable ratings for the first quarter of 2018; Fox News, number one; MSNBC, number two, and CNN, seven.

CNN is being beaten by channels like HGTV, Investigation, Discovery and Nickelodeon. What happened? Let's take a look.

Here are the stories CNN has decide own recently -- a missing plane.


DON LEMON, ANCHOR, CNN: Whether it was hijacking or terrorism or mechanical failure or pilot error, but what if it was something fully that we don't really understand. A lot of people have been asking about black holes.


WATTERS: A fired possibly drunk Trump hanger runner.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Talking to you, I have smelled alcohol on your breath.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, I have not had a drink.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You haven't had a drink, so that's not...


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So, I just -- because it is the talk out there. Again, I know it's awkward. Let me just give you the questions that you can categorically (inaudible)...


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My answer is no. I have not.




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. Besides my meds.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Anti-depressants, is that okay?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, I am not -- I am just trying to understand...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, look, they can say...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What happened today?


WATTERS: And a porn star.


LEMON: Stormy Daniels have the President's number? It sure seems that way.




LEMONS: Stormy Daniels.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The reason he can't engage with Stormy Daniels is because she has got his number.


WATTERS: But how does that square with CNN'S new promo that casts the network as a paragon of journalistic credibility?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is an apple. Some people might try tell you that it is a banana. They might scream banana, banana, banana over and over and over again.

They might put banana in all caps. You might even start to believe that this is a banana.

But it's not.


WATTERS: So, CNN is in the truth telling business. What about CNN's fake news story about Trump, Jr. coordinating with WikiLeaks? Or CNN's fake video of Trump feeding fish in Japan? Or CNN's fake news story about Comey's testimony? Or CNN's fake news story about Scaramucci and the Russians? Which was redacted and led to three people resigning?

And CNN prime time has become almost unwatchable. Here is why.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can I answer your damn question about who cares that people who are the immigrants who are sick and tired of having this White House have (inaudible) and bash us on a daily basis.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... I am sick and tired of this (inaudible) real voice in my ears.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: ... that people who are maligned on a daily basis.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That was an excuse. Look at the...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And now, someone is dead...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... look at even how they got the permit and can I finish, Simone, will you just shut up for a minute and let me finish.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Hey, Mister, you don't get to tell me to shut up on national television.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The guy doesn't even know the law. He is a thug. Your friend is a thug.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Well, thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's a million dollar...


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A million dollars.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You hated it because you're just so weak inside. That's your substantive argument to me, Rick Wilson who backed every losing candidate in that...


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: John, I will gut you like a fish on the show if you want to keep this up.


WATTERS: Now, this type of mayhem completely undercuts CNN's so-called "identity" as a straight news network. There are great journalists at the network, don't get me wrong. I am just not going to name them because I don't know if they'd take that as a compliment coming from me.

But the bottom line is, the network is filled with Trump-hating, tabloid food fights. You don't believe me? Look at how much time was devoted to Stormy Daniels compared to how much time was devoted to the spending bill.

The spending bill obviously has much more impact on the lives of Americans than gossip, but maybe CNN is just trying to hold people's attention while they are waiting for their flight at the airport or maybe they are just throwing Hail Mary's because they are in last place.

Here with her reaction, conservative commentator and the host of CRTV's "Michelle Malkin Investigates," Michelle...

WATTERS: ... Malkin. Good to see you, Michelle.


WATTERS: So what do you think about that CNN analysis? I mean, I just think they are desperate. What do you have to say?

MALKIN: Well, I think you are spot on. Forget apples and bananas. CNN is serving up rotten fruit that they dress up as news, and it's no longer a news network anymore, and clearly former CNN viewers are voting with their fingers and walking right up to the remote control and changing the channel.

The network no longer provides information, and it certainly isn't entertaining any more to people. You should have given a health warning before you played that little montage there, Jesse because I should have taken an ibuprofen beforehand. I have got this ringing headache.

And it is a shame, and I want to be fair, because I think you're absolutely right that there are good journalists there, and even though they won't accept our praise for it, I mean, you've got people who are foreign correspondents and war correspondents, veterans of many, many wars of coverage, and now it's embarrassing because they are essentially promoters for porn stars and people who really need to take medication on their own.

WATTERS: I'm sorry, Michelle for not warning you about the food fight video.

MALKIN: I know.

WATTER: I do apologize and I apologize to the "Watters' World" viewers, but you know, that's probably the only time they've see CNN.

I want to ask you about comments from Robert de Niro. I mean, this guy has been going off for quite some time talking about how he wants to punch the President in the face, and I think he was asked about the success of "Roseanne" and trying to see the other side. This is we had to say. Look at this, ready? Let's put this up here.

"We are at a point with all of us where it's beyond trying to see another person's points of view. There are ways you can talk about that, but we are at the point where the things that are happening in our country are so bad, and it comes from Trump. There are so many people who have left this administration. It's a serious thing."

Now, I mean, he's a terrific actor, Michelle, but I mean, terrible political commentary. There is not a lot of bad things that have come from this President. I mean, ISIS has been pretty much wiped off the map, the caliphate is gone. Manufacturing jobs are way up. Wages are bigger. But to say that you are not even going to listen the other side is just dehumanizing the opposition and that's dangerous.

MALKIN: It is and of course, this is a trend on the left for many years and decades now. It is encrusted in far left liberal ideology. And I guess, we can thank Robert de Niro for at least being transparent about it because most of these pro-progressives will pay lip service to tolerance.

But they justify their intolerance. They justify their incitements to violence. They justify their hatred in the name of social justice, and I think it's about time that more of them like Robert de Niro drop the pretense and so we can see them for who they truly are.

And the thing about President Trump is, he has been able to expose the true colors of so many of the enemies not just of conservatives but of America.

WATTERS: Yes, you know, he brings out the best in people that sometimes work for him and then he brings out the worst in people.

You have seen that in CNN. You have seen that in Hollywood and I agree and it is interesting because the Democrats always want to empathize and hear what the other side has to say if it's North Korea they want to hear for them, if it is the Mullahs in Iran they want to know and empathize and hear their point of view and talk about root causes.

But when it comes to their fellow Americans, Republicans and Trump voters, they don't have any empathy. They don't have any sympathy. They don't even want to hear.

Speaking of people in Hollywood, another guy really sounded off. Now, this guy is a famous director, Joss Whedon or something like that. He did the "Avengers." Listen to what he tweeted. He actually had to delete it. He says this, "Donald Trump is killing this country. Some of it quickly, some slowly. But he spoils and destroys everything he touches. He emboldens monsters wielding guns, governmental power or just smug double speak, or Russia. My hate and sadness are exhausting. Die, Don, just quietly die."

First of all, that's just a word salad, Michelle. I can't even make any sense of that, but "Die, Don, die" to punctuate it. Could you imagine if a conservative film director said something like that about Obama?

MALKIN: Yes, well, we know what would happen. Of course, these double standards have existed far beyond the Obama administration. But there are a couple of things that are going on here. And one is, the shield of immunity with which so many of these hateful liberals who wish death not only upon Donald Trump, but his entire family, all the conservatives and Republicans in public life. I have been subject to it for 25 years and so have you as you have gotten more prominent as well, Jesse.

And it just is a part of being conservative that we have to accept, but what we should not accept is the double standards of social media outlets, giants like Facebook and Twitter that will discriminate against conservatives for conducting themselves civilly online while looking at other way at things like this.

Even just tonight, you know, we had this fire that happened at Trump Tower and there are verified blue check mark, Twitter liberals who are gloating over this accident here at Trump Tower, even though three firefighters and one civilian were hurt. Shame on these people.

You know, it tells you something about -- very important about political theory. There is something called the Overton window, right, it is the window that allows a certain amount of public discourse, and outlets like CNN that are not media, but that are dictators of what is acceptable speech will allow the worst kind of vile behavior and speech by the left and look the other way while they try and gag our speech.

This is why Fox News, the blogosphere talk radio, alternative media are on the rise be we will not expect a gag anymore. We will not accept the double standards.

WATTERS: All right, Michelle. Thank you very much.

MALKIN: You bet.

WATTERS: Coming up, big news on the FISA abuse scandal. Stick around.

JULIE BANDERAS, ANCHOR, FOX NEWS: This is a Fox News alert. I am Julie Banderas. Sad news from Trump Tower -- one man dead, four firefighters injured in a fire at Trump Tower here in New York City.

The four-alarm fire broke out in a residence on the 50th floor about three hours ago. The victim is identified as a 51-year-old man. He was unconscious when firefighters arrived. Four firefighters suffered only minor injuries. No members of the First Family were present at the time of the fire.

So, far no word on a cause.

Meanwhile, 15 people killed and several others injured in a crash involving a bus carrying a youth hockey team in Western Canada. Officials say a semi-trailer slammed into the bus on the highway last night. There were 29 people on board at the time.

Among those killed are the team's coach and captain. The driver of the semi survived. He was initially detained. He has since been released. The cause of the crash is under investigation.

I'm Julie Banderas. Now, back to "Watters' World." You are watching the Fox News channel.

WATTERS: Big news regarding the Obama FISA scandal. House Republicans have been asking for a very long time to see the FISA warrant applications that allowed the Obama administration to spy on the Trump campaign, specifically Carter Page.

The Department of Justice promising to turnover another 1,000 pages on Monday, but the President is still not happy with the slow results tweeting earlier, "What does the Department of Justice and FBI have to hide? Why aren't they giving the strongly requested documents un-redacted to the House Judiciary Committee? Stalling. But for what reason? Not looking good."

Here with reaction, Florida Congressman Ron DeSantis. So, Congressman, my inclination here is the reason that they are stalling these documents is because these documents probably confirm what was outlined in the Nunes memo, which said pretty clearly that these FISA warrant applications relied almost entirely on this fake dossier from Russian sources that Hillary Clinton paid for. Do you think that's the case?

REP. RON DESANTIS, R-FLORIDA: I think you are right in the sense that both Justice and FBI have tried for months and months to deemphasize this dossier. They realize it looks bad that they used it and they tried to say "Well, look, this wasn't the only thing."

The problem though with doing that. Jesse is you will note, yes, the Judiciary Committee were trying to get those million documents and hopefully, we'll start getting a better production. But Devin Nunes on the Intel Committee, he is trying to just get a handful of documents that kicked off the so-called collusion investigation.


DESANTIS: Why did Peter Strzok open this? And they are fighting him on that. And I think the reason both of those go together because I think they started it on very thin gruel, I think it was a very thin reason to open up a counter-intelligence case. And then, I think, it was the dossier that got them to go forward with FISA, so the start of it was...

WATTERS: It was the surveillance.


DESANTIS: Weak and then using the dossier was weak, and it just makes them look really, really bad.

WATTERS: Okay, the initial counter-intelligence operation, we believe was opened up in July, right after the FBI closed the case on Hillary which was a rigged investigation. Remember, they exonerated her before they even interviewed her and they never even put her under oath. Strzok and Lisa Page and Comey heavily involved in that situation.

And then, it was Peter Strzok himself that personally opened up this investigation into Trump and Russia.

WATTERS: And apparently, our sources are saying that it was a Clinton Foundation donor that tipped off the FBI about some conversation with this guy Papadopoulos, no one has ever heard of Papadopoulos had in London about Russia, which was also just as thin as the dossier.

So, if Strzok's name and Clinton's name are connected to the initial opening of the investigation. And then the dossier and Strzok's name are linked to the FISA application, I mean, the whole thing is crooked from the jump.

DESANTIS: And just think about this, you have this Hillary investigation about her mishandling of classified information. Peter Strzok is like the main agent on that and I will -- and you and I will agree that he did a bad job. They basically, this thing was -- the fix was in.

But how does that guy then start to open an investigation of only Trump's campaign? Did they not have any other agents at the FBI?

WATTERS: No, he is a lead investigator on both investigations.

DESANTIS: And he was the one Lisa Page said, "Hey, when you go interview Hillary, don't go in there with guns blazing, she is going to be the next President." And then of course, after he opened the investigation involving Trump's campaign, he is texting page saying, "No, you know, we can't take the risk of a Trump presidency. We need an insurance policy."

So, all of these stuff fits in to say, you know, this is a guy who should have never been involved in either of those investigations, and so we need to get all of the documents from the beginning and look, this guy needs to be fired from the FBI. I think he probably will be.


WATTERS: I know, he's still working and he is still collecting a paycheck, which is a total disgrace.


DESANTIS: It is, but I think...

WATTERS: And some of the horrible things he said about Donald Trump like you also said, protecting the country against his presidency and needing an insurance policy. And then he was the one that conducted the Flynn interview. Snuck up on Flynn in the White House and Flynn never even had a lawyer.

So, this guy is all over every investigation and not only that, Mueller brings him on to the team and he is biased that Mueller has to fire him.

DESANTIS: And Lisa Page.


WATTERS: I've got to run, Congressman, I know. I have got to run, Congressman. Thank you so much and we are going to follow the story, all right?

DESANTIS: Thank you.

WATTERS: Diamond and Silk, up next.

WATTERS: Lots of news this week surrounding the current and former First Ladies. First up, Michelle Obama comparing President Trump to a negligent parent.


MICHELLE OBAMA, FORMER FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES: And I already sort of felt like the eight years that Barack was President, it was sort of like having the good parent at home, you know. the responsible parent. The one that told you to eat your carrots and go to bed on time.

And now, perhaps we have the other parent in the house and we thought it feels fun, maybe it feels fun to some for now because we can eat candy all day and stay up late and not follow the rules.


WATTERS: Joining me now with their reaction, my favorite video bloggers and Trump supporters, Diamond and Silk. So, ladies, what gets me about this analogy is, it's typical of the left. They believe government is the parent and the citizens are all the children, and the government is there to take care of us. What did you think about the former First Lady's commentary?

DIAMOND, VIDEO BLOGGER: Well, let me just say this here. Let's look at Obama's parenting.


DIAMOND: You know, he sent us so many sugar honey iced tea that the American people started walking around constipated.

SILK: That's right.

DIAMOND: You know, we couldn't catch a cold much less, catch a tax cut.

SILK: That's right.

DIAMOND: He talked about -- he wants to give us or feed us some Obamacare, we got Obama without the care.

SILK: Yes.

DIAMOND: He said, we wanted to make some change, well? He made out with a lot of money but we made out shortchanged.

SILK: That's right.

DIAMOND: So, what Michelle needs to do is take her husband by the hand...

SILK: Yes.

DIAMOND: With Hillary Clinton, go in the woods and zip it. We don't want to hear nothing else they have to say. They don't know what they already did. Don't talk about this President.

SILK: That's right.

DIAMOND: Because this President has done more in one year than her husband was able to do in eight years.

SILK: That's right, and if Michelle wants to talk about parents, talk about how she allowed her oldest daughter to intern for Harvey Weinstein.

WATTERS: Well, I don't know if they knew about Harvey's behavior when she let her do that, but I think if she had known, she probably wouldn't have let her do that.


SILK: But, Jesse, her parenting skills should have -- yes, that's right, her mother intuition should have let her know that something wasn't right.

WATTERS: Something was definitely not right with old Harvey Weinstein. Now, she is also making remarks about Hillary again blaming sexism, let's listen.


OBAMA: Women weren't comfortable voting for a woman, sadly. And especially in this room, we have to own that reality.


OBAMA: To me, that's the deeper question for us today as women. What happened? The best qualified candidate in this last race was a woman and she wasn't perfect, but she was way more perfect than many of the alternatives.


WATTERS: Now, the truth here is that Hillary didn't lose because of the female vote. She actually won the female vote. She lost because she got crushed by middle class voters. Trump just won the middle class by double digits. That's the real reason.


DIAMOND: I think what's sexist is the fact that Michelle Obama is trying to make women feel guilty for not wanting to vote for crooked Hillary. She was a crook and...

WATTERS: I think you're right.

DIAMOND: And she was the one that told us that if Hillary couldn't run her house, how could she run the White House?

SILK: That's right.

DIAMOND: So, no, we were not going to vote for crooked Hillary. We voted for the man, the businessman, not the woman.

SILK: That's right, and Michelle did have one point right. Hillary Clinton wasn't perfect. She wasn't per perfectly fit for the White House.

DIAMOND: That's right.

WATTERS: Okay, and lastly, this is Hillary herself in her own words actually saying that she had something to do with the #metoo movement. Let's here it.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Alternate reality. It's March 2018 and you are the president. Has the #metoo movement happened?

HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES: Yes. Yes, it has. Yes, I believe that. I believe it was a wave that was building and building and building. I think my losing probably accelerated that wave, but the wave was coming.


WATTERS: So, Hillary Clinton accelerated the #metoo movement. What do you think about that, ladies?

DIAMOND: You know what? Hillary needs to start the she knew movement.

SILK: That's right.

DIAMOND: Because I am quite sure she knew about her husband and all of his alleged misses and we know that she may have, we would say allegedly knew about that Harvey Weinstein because she knew, we all know she took money from him and didn't give it back.

SILK: That's right.

DIAMOND: So, maybe she should start her a new movement called "she knew."

SILK: That's right. And she also knew one more other thing, that if she would have been President of the United States, she would have sold half of America for a paid speech.

WATTERS: That's right. All right, Diamond and Silk. They are on tour. Go to their website., and check them out. Thank you, ladies.

Up next, Christian privilege and white fragility -- white people are fragile, what does that even mean? We debate it up next.

WATTERS: Less than a week since the stirring of Christianity is coming under fire, this time at the campus of George Washington University where the school is holding a seminar bashing Christianity for giving American Christians what it views as an unfair privilege.

Warren Blumenfeld is an adjunct professor at University of Massachusetts at Amherst whose research topics include religion, gender and LGBT issues. He joins me now.

Okay, so professor, you say there is Christian privilege here. Is there not Christian privilege in the Middle East, is there?

WARREN BLUMENFELD, ADJUNCT PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS AT AMHERST: We are talking about the United States right now, but there is Christian privilege around the world in many ways, but I would like to correct you. It's not bashing Christianity, it's raising issues of the ways in which Christians automatically have this unearned privilege just by being Christian in the United States.

WATTERS: And what would that privilege be?


BLUMENFELD: There is a lot of ways that privilege manifests itself. In the 1840s, a theorist went around the United States and he wrote this great book call "Democracy In America," Alexis de Tocqueville and he discovered that there is this paradox in some ways, that the United States positioned itself around the world as this country which promoted itself as religious pluralism.

But he found that the Christian churches had so much power, that in many it could be considered to be the first example of the first institution of politics because it had so much power and so much weight on politics in the United States.

WATTERS: Well, I don't think any more that the Christian church has that type of power. I mean, it's a pretty religiously pluralistic nation and there is...


BLUMENFELD: And that's one of the myths that we were....

WATTERS: ... and now, you can't have the Ten Commandments at the courthouse or you know, if you are a Christian and you want to say "Merry Christmas" in public school, they yell at you. You can't have a Christmas tree, they call it a Holiday tree. Is that privilege?

BLUMENFELD: We are talking about religious pluralism. The school year is founded on the Christian calendar. If I want to take a day off to go to -- do you even know what the holiest day is on the Jewish calendar is?

WATTERS: No, tell me.

BLUMENFELD: And that's a form of Christian privilege. You don't have to know other religions of when our holidays are. It's Yom Kippur, which is the Day of Atonement. And it usually comes...

WATTERS: Okay, so I have the privilege of not knowing what your most devout holiday is? That's a privilege to not know something?

BLUMENFELD: Yes. You don't have to know.

WATTERS: I would think that that would be the opposite. I feel bad that I don't know. I mean, you know, listen there's not a lot of Jewish Americans in the country compared to Christian Americans. I don't know the most of devout Muslim holiday either.

BLUMENFELD: Of course. And again, minoritized people have to know of the holidays of Christians for our own survival because it's just self- promoted.

WATTERS: Okay, let's solve this then because I don't want Christian privilege. I just want to be open and I want to know everything about every other person and I don't want to feel privileged.

What can I do as a Christian to make myself feel less privileged?

BLUMENFELD: I'm not asking you to make yourself less privileged. I am asking you to share your privilege, like as a white man, I don't want to lose my white privilege. I don't want to walk into a store and be tailed, racially profiled. I am not saying I want to lose that.

But I am working as a white person so that I share my privilege so that nobody is racially profiled in this country.

WATTERS: Okay, I don't know how to share privilege. I don't know if it would be just like toss it out like that? Privilege here, privilege there. Listen, I am going to have you back on and we're going to talk about how I am going to share privilege. Professor, thank you very much. Up next, "Last Call."

Time for "Last Call." Attention shoppers. Yodeling on aisle eight. An 11-year-old boy stunning Walmart goers in his rendition of Hank William's "Love Sick Blues," listen.




WATTERS: This kid is famous and we are trying to get him on "Watters' World" so stay tuned. He may be on next week. So, don't miss it. That's all for us tonight. Be sure to follow me on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. "Justice with Judge Jeanine" is next and remember, I am Watters and this is my world.


Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.